We wrote an article requesting Muslims on Agniveer site to share their views on certain specific points relating to terrorist and barbaric views of likes of Zakir Naik. This was done to segregate good Muslims from fanatics who were threatening Agniveer and all critics of ‘Terrorist Islam of Zakir Naik et al’ with dire consequences. You can review the article here:
The results from comments and mails that we received were most disappointing and shocking:
a. Not one single Muslim dared to condemn Zakir Naik for his justification of killing apostates and forbidding non-Muslims to preach in Muslim countries yet have rights for Muslims to propagate Islam in non-Muslim countries. Thus Zakir Naik is more important to them than the great Muhammad!
b. There were people who vaguely agreed to most of the points of articles were still refused to reject or condemn the books and people who support such views strongly. On other hand they would very vociferously condemn Agniveer for these articles defending Muhammad and rejecting the false Islam! Why such double standards? Nothing except Al-Taqiah (concept of fraud legitimized by religion) can explain it.
c. Many claimed that there is no concept of nationalism in Islam. A Muslim should only support a Muslim regardless of country. Thus cheating one’s own country to support a Muslim from other country represents true Islam as per them! In other words, they agree that one should never be assured about patriotism of Muslims!
This is one of the greatest dilemmas for good Muslims – how-so-much patriotic they may be, Al-Taqiah or ‘divinely blessed fraud’ and anti-national ideologies of their leaders and representatives would always put a question mark on their credibility.
d. There were people who openly justified things like Jaziya on non-Muslims because Muslims also pay another kind of tax. They refused to justify why tax-system should be based on one’s religion. And no Muslim criticized such views. Discrimination on basis of religion is something ingrained in their blood from very childhood and nothing can be more dangerous for humanity.
e. Not one single Muslim came up to say that all such Hadiths which insult Muhammad or humanity in general should be rejected regardless of they being called ‘Sahih’ (Correct) or not.
In other words, its ok for them to call Muhammad a pedophile, rapist, murderer, psychopath, lecher and they would go all lengths to justify all these through most perverted logics. But they would not agree to simply reject all these bogus verses that insult the great person. To the fanatic Muslim, their uneducated Ulemas and semi-literate witch-doctors like Zakir Naik are more important that Muhammad.
So blinded are they by vision of fanatic Islam, that they refuse to apply their minds to conclude even this much that if Islam means humble submission or peace, all the verses of Quran or Hadiths that talk of contrary have to be false!
f. No one condemned Saudi Arab or other countries for disallowing other religions but justified their rights to preach Islam elsewhere! They simply stated that it is their internal matter and hence they would not comment. I wonder why they do not apply the same standards for Agniveer site or Ali Sina or Salman Rushdie. When they can refuse to comment on Saudi Arab killing apostates in name of Islam, what prompts them to apply altogether different standards for non-Muslims? Are we witnessing yet another form of Al-Taqiah?